[Gluster-devel] v3.6.3 doesn't respect default ACLs?
Raghavendra Bhat
rabhat at redhat.com
Wed Jul 29 10:30:48 UTC 2015
On 07/27/2015 08:30 PM, Glomski, Patrick wrote:
> I built a patched version of 3.6.4 and the problem does seem to be
> fixed on a test server/client when I mounted with those flags (acl,
> resolve-gids, and gid-timeout). Seeing as it was a test system, I
> can't really provide anything meaningful as to the performance hit
> seen without the gid-timeout option. Thank you for implementing it so
> quickly, though!
>
> Is there any chance of getting this fix incorporated in the upcoming
> 3.6.5 release?
>
> Patrick
I am planning to include this fix in 3.6.5. This fix is still under
review. Once it is accepted in master, it cab be backported to
release-3.6 branch. I will wait till then and make 3.6.5.
Regards,
Raghavendra Bhat
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Niels de Vos <ndevos at redhat.com
> <mailto:ndevos at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 10:30:04PM +0200, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 03:20:41PM -0400, Glomski, Patrick wrote:
> > > Gluster devs,
> > >
> > > I'm running gluster v3.6.3 (both server and client side). Since my
> > > application requires more than 32 groups, I don't mount with
> ACLs on the
> > > client. If I mount with ACLs between the bricks and set a
> default ACL on
> > > the server, I think I'm right in stating that the server
> should respect
> > > that ACL whenever a new file or folder is made.
> >
> > I would expect that the ACL gets in herited on the brick. When a new
> > file is created without the default ACL, things seem to be
> wrong. You
> > mention that creating the file directly on the brick has the correct
> > ACL, so there must be some Gluster component interfering.
> >
> > You reminded me on IRC about this email, and that helped a lot.
> Its very
> > easy to get distracted when trying to investigate things from the
> > mailinglists.
> >
> > I had a brief look, and I think we could reach a solution. An
> ugly patch
> > for initial testing is ready. Well... it compiles. I'll try to
> run some
> > basic tests tomorrow and see if it improves things and does not
> crash
> > immediately.
> >
> > The change can be found here:
> > http://review.gluster.org/11732
> >
> > It basically adds a "resolve-gids" mount option for the FUSE client.
> > This causes the fuse daemon to call getgrouplist() and retrieve
> all the
> > groups for the UID that accesses the mountpoint. Without this
> option,
> > the behavior is not changed, and /proc/$PID/status is used to
> get up to
> > 32 groups (the $PID is the process that accesses the mountpoint).
> >
> > You probably want to also mount with "gid-timeout=N" where N is
> seconds
> > that the group cache is valid. In the current master branch this
> is set
> > to 300 seconds (like the sssd default), but if the groups of a used
> > rarely change, this value can be increased. Previous versions had a
> > lower timeout which could cause resolving the groups on almost each
> > network packet that arrives (HUGE performance impact).
> >
> > When using this option, you may also need to enable
> server.manage-gids.
> > This option allows using more than ~93 groups on the bricks. The
> network
> > packets can only contain ~93 groups, when server.manage-gids is
> enabled,
> > the groups are not sent in the network packets, but are resolved
> on the
> > bricks with getgrouplist().
>
> The patch linked above had been tested, corrected and updated. The
> change works for me on a test-system.
>
> A backport that you should be able to include in a package for 3.6 can
> be found here: http://termbin.com/f3cj
> Let me know if you are not familiar with rebuilding patched packages,
> and I can build a test-version for you tomorrow.
>
> On glusterfs-3.6, you will want to pass a gid-timeout mount option
> too.
> The option enables caching of the resolved groups that the uid belongs
> too, if caching is not enebled (or expires quickly), you will probably
> notice a preformance hit. Newer version of GlusterFS set the
> timeout to
> 300 seconds (like the default timeout sssd uses).
>
> Please test and let me know if this fixes your use case.
>
> Thanks,
> Niels
>
>
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Niels
> >
> > > Maybe an example is in order:
> > >
> > > We first set up a test directory with setgid bit so that our new
> > > subdirectories inherit the group.
> > > [root at gfs01a hpc_shared]# mkdir test; cd test; chown
> pglomski.users .;
> > > chmod 2770 .; getfacl .
> > > # file: .
> > > # owner: pglomski
> > > # group: users
> > > # flags: -s-
> > > user::rwx
> > > group::rwx
> > > other::---
> > >
> > > New subdirectories share the group, but the umask leads to
> them being group
> > > read-only.
> > > [root at gfs01a test]# mkdir a; getfacl a
> > > # file: a
> > > # owner: root
> > > # group: users
> > > # flags: -s-
> > > user::rwx
> > > group::r-x
> > > other::r-x
> > >
> > > Setting default ACLs on the server allows group write to new
> directories
> > > made on the server.
> > > [root at gfs01a test]# setfacl -m d:g::rwX ./; mkdir b; getfacl b
> > > # file: b
> > > # owner: root
> > > # group: users
> > > # flags: -s-
> > > user::rwx
> > > group::rwx
> > > other::---
> > > default:user::rwx
> > > default:group::rwx
> > > default:other::---
> > >
> > > The respect for ACLs is (correctly) shared across bricks.
> > > [root at gfs02a test]# getfacl b
> > > # file: b
> > > # owner: root
> > > # group: users
> > > # flags: -s-
> > > user::rwx
> > > group::rwx
> > > other::---
> > > default:user::rwx
> > > default:group::rwx
> > > default:other::---
> > >
> > > [root at gfs02a test]# mkdir c; getfacl c
> > > # file: c
> > > # owner: root
> > > # group: users
> > > # flags: -s-
> > > user::rwx
> > > group::rwx
> > > other::---
> > > default:user::rwx
> > > default:group::rwx
> > > default:other::---
> > >
> > > However, when folders are created client-side, the default
> ACLs appear on
> > > the server, but don't seem to be correctly applied.
> > > [root at client test]# mkdir d; getfacl d
> > > # file: d
> > > # owner: root
> > > # group: users
> > > # flags: -s-
> > > user::rwx
> > > group::r-x
> > > other::---
> > >
> > > [root at gfs01a test]# getfacl d
> > > # file: d
> > > # owner: root
> > > # group: users
> > > # flags: -s-
> > > user::rwx
> > > group::r-x
> > > other::---
> > > default:user::rwx
> > > default:group::rwx
> > > default:other::---
> > >
> > > As no groups or users were specified, I shouldn't need to
> specify a mask
> > > for the ACL and, indeed, specifying a mask doesn't help.
> > >
> > > If it helps diagnose the problem, the volume options are as
> follows:
> > > Options Reconfigured:
> > > performance.io-thread-count: 32
> > > performance.cache-size: 128MB
> > > performance.write-behind-window-size: 128MB
> > > server.allow-insecure: on
> > > network.ping-timeout: 10
> > > storage.owner-gid: 100
> > > geo-replication.indexing: off
> > > geo-replication.ignore-pid-check: on
> > > changelog.changelog: on
> > > changelog.fsync-interval: 3
> > > changelog.rollover-time: 15
> > > server.manage-gids: on
> > >
> > > This approach to server-side ACLs worked properly with
> previous versions of
> > > gluster. Can anyone assess the situation for me, confirm/deny that
> > > something changed, and possibly suggest how I can achieve
> inherited groups
> > > with write permission for new subdirectories in a >32-group
> environment?
> > >
> > > Thanks for your time,
> > >
> > > Patrick
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Gluster-devel mailing list
> > > Gluster-devel at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-devel at gluster.org>
> > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
> >
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20150729/5e760718/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Gluster-devel
mailing list